Author: librarianowl

The times, they are a changing…

Thanks for stopping by! If this is your first time on Librarian Owl, let me extend a hearty welcome. Alternatively, if you have been here in the past, thanks for stopping by again.

As you can see, it’s been a while since my last post. However, that will soon be changing. As re-enter the world of Freelance Instructional Designer, I plan on blogging my journey, thoughts, successes, and failures. So, consider this an invitation to come along for the journey.

If you’re so inclined, I’d love to hear from you either in the comments below, or via a private message using the form found on the Contact Info page.

Talk to you soon!

Ryan

Not at all on topic…

Hey!

I had thought about writing something about the Google vs. Universities lawsuit/scandal on going, but there isn’t much new I can write at the moment, and it has been given pretty good coverage across the Internet already.  So, I have decided to go off topic today and give you something short, but still kinda cool.

This has nothing to do with Libraries, but it does have to do with technology, and the advances that we are making with our knowledge as humans.

The Kepler space telescope recently found evidence of a planet that orbits two suns (read about it HERE) and that got me thinking about how fast we are learning and discovering new things; and how hard it is to keep abreast of everything.

Now, this isn’t some whimsical ode to the greatness of humanity and our inevitable march forward, but rather a nod to how quickly we are gathering new information, and how difficult it is to stay ‘current’. It seems in every field there is an explosion of research and progress, and I suppose the question could be asked, is that a result of our connectivity via technology and the internet, or is technology and the internet a product of that explosion of knowledge?

That question could be debated for a long time, and is not a new one.

What I do wonder though, is how far do we see this going, and how, in a world like this, will it be possible for educators to maintain their place for any length of time?

Let me explain.

When I went to elementary and high school, I was taught by many teachers of many different ages. There were definitely some older educators, and I wonder, is that perhaps a relic of the past? Is it even possible for a teacher to stay abreast enough in their field to have a career that is 30 – 40 years long, without becoming outdated or behind the times?

It is nice to think that we may be able to keep on top of a certain part of our fields, and that may ever be possible. But has education become a young man/woman’s game? At least at the elementary and secondary level where their is a much greater range of material that needs to be taught?

Surely that can’t be true, can it?

When I think about how hard it is to adapt curriculum to changes, and of the teachers that we have all worked with that seem behind the times and stuck in their ways, I wonder not ‘will’ this happen to new teachers, but rather, how soon?

Perhaps this is a little pessimistic, but I think it may be a valid, albeit difficult question. Undoubtedly, there is a place for older, more seasoned educators. Experience in invaluable, and helps to make sure things aren’t changed so quickly that unforeseen, or perhaps foreseeable, problems don’t needlessly arise.

But is the day coming when after 10 years, 15 years, 5 years even, that what you teach will be outdated?

In other words, how long can you stay on topic, before the topic has left you behind?

Ryan

Hey!

Let me start out by apologizing for being a day late. Hopefully that won’t happen again. 🙂

I was walking through Zellers the other day, and I couldn’t help but notice that there are already stacks of Halloween material sitting out, just waiting for a sugar-hungry child or adult to pick up and purchase.

Smart consumerism no doubt, who doesn’t love a nice little piece of candy now and then.

What struck me though was when later that day I stopped in at my local library and saw that they also had Halloween books and displays already being put up. After the initial rejection of the display as being over 6 weeks too early, I started to wonder about things on a deeper level though.

Why do our libraries put up Halloween, Easter, Christmas displays?

This isn’t an anti-religious holiday’s discussion, so please don’t think I am going that way. It may appear that way to begin with, but I promise, I hope to frame a little bit different of a question. So please bear with me.

What about those who don’t adhere to the same traditions that we do? What about those people who may not feel at home in a culture that celebrates certain events and holidays? Do I think that those who DO follow a certain belief system should have to keep quiet for the sake of equality – no. Do I think that putting up displays equals oppression, or conversely, equality – no.

What I do wonder though, is what drives us to make the decisions on what gets put on display, and what doesn’t?

Now I am very aware that there is a discussion on the aforementioned equality, assimilation, and cultural domination, and I promise to return to that conversation in a later post. However, I have started several classes this semester, and one in particular has been talking about the concept of community.

Community has been a term that gets bandied about quite a lot. Local communities. The breakdown of communities. Online Communities. Creating communities.

The list really does go on.

One of the crucial components of community (and there are several) is the sense of shared identity and values, which helps to create a sense of belonging. When I think about that library and it’s Halloween display, I see a reflection of that neighborhoods, and probably the cities overarching, value and beliefs.

But haven’t we heard for a long time that local communities are breaking down? Aren’t online communities the wave of the future?

Everyone who is reading this is undoubtedly part of at least one, mostly likely several, online communities.

Whether it be the loose and ethereal bonds of Facebook, a more structured learning community, a chat board, web-group, etc. everyone is part of some community that exists online.

And if sociologists are right, and I think they might be, these online communities are eroding face-to-face communities and dwindling the physical ties that we have to our surroundings. Simply view how many people are absorbed in their cell phones and tablets while walking down the street, and you can see that the online world is far more enthralling currently than day to day life.

That may be a bad thing, and it may be a good thing. I’ll leave the ethics of that for a later date.

The crux of what I wanted to get at though, was the seemingly hopeless challenge that is facing libraries right now. We’ve established that they are places where community and gathering happens, yet at the same time they are supposed to provide access and connections to larger ‘virtual’ communities, which are shaped by decidedly different values and beliefs.

Is it possible for one place to provide an anchor to a physical community, while at the same time be a port to digital, global communities? And even if it is possible, how does a library ever truly stay modern, while still trying to remain grounded against a tide that is becoming increasingly less interested with the immediate physical neighborhood around itself?

The ability to not have to temper any of your personality and beliefs because you can find an online community to belong to can be a wonderful thing. But what about our libraries that can’t be everything to everyone? What values can they represent that isn’t immediately driving people away from them because it isn’t THEIR values? What happens when the physical community is  longer coherent enough as a unit to even have values to represent? Then what?

In essence, what can they put up as a display that won’t seem hopelessly anachronistic in the face of a digital wave? Will libraries eventually become the physical meeting place of those who don’t want to find community online but prefer it face to face? Will they become the domains on those who can’t afford that way of life? Or perhaps of the educated and elite who can afford the luxury of seeking out like minded individuals to interact with face to face?

The weight of trying to serve the needs of a physical community that is becoming more and more detached, while also keeping abreast of the tide of digital communities seems like a Herculean task for libraries in the 21st Century.  Is it a fair one?

And this doesn’t even touch on the conundrum of trying to deal with the reality that many times it is minority ethnic groups who most use the physical space of the library, and their values may differ greatly from where the library funding comes from. Another sticky issue for another day.

So what do you think? Is this an impossible task? Or is there a way be an anchor to an increasingly eroding physical community, while still providing entry to digital communities? Should libraries be asked to do this? And if so, what should they put up for a display as you enter the building? Or perhaps more poignantly, should it be the same as what they display on websites/computer backgrounds?

Ryan

Quick Update

Hey Everyone!

Welcome back to another semester/year of school! I hope that summer treated everyone well, and that we aren’t quite at the end of the nice weather yet. 🙂

I have a been taking a quick step away from writing the past 10 days or so, but with courses starting up again, I hope to be back into the swing of making 2 posts a week. I’ll try for the Tuesday/Friday framework again, and will hopefully be back in the saddle by next Tuesday.

If I get inspired though, Friday may bring something as well. Lol.

Good luck to everyone; student, teacher, and otherwise!

Ryan

iPads, inclusion, and ethics…

I apologize about the lateness and brevity of this post – I’m feeling rather off today, but I still wanted to share something that fits with what we’ve been talking about in the last few posts.

As I was scanning Tame the Web, a libraries,technology and people Blog by Michael Stephens, I noticed an entry from this past Sunday about Freed-Hardeman University (FHU) introducing iPads, Digital Text Books, and Faculty training in these technologies as part of a program called iKnow2.0.

The basic thrust of the linked piece was that Freed-Hardemen was going to issue all new Freshmen iPads upon their entry into the iKnow program in Fall 2012, and are working to put together an entire educational system, including the retraining of professors and staff, centered around using this technology.

To my knowledge, this marks one of the first post-secondary, and perhaps first ever, complete move towards tablet based education. While the concept has been talked about before, the scope and depth of this program seems to outstrip any other efforts, reaching even into retraining staff on how to use the equipment.

Not to mention that they are supplying the technology to students themselves.

The real gem in all of this is that at the same time they are announcing a partnership with Inkling, a company that works to produce interactive and enriched content for iPad. The goal is, in their own words, to “reinvent the way people learn on the campus of Freed-Hardeman.”

That’s a pretty bold statement, and one the bears some watching.

Amidst all of this excitement though, there was one sentence fragment that did give me pause however.

Near the top, FHU states that they will be establishing minimum MacBook requirements for students. While that did non specify whether it was ownership, or merely proficiency, I cant help but feel that this is a bad decision.

Obviously, if at the early stages they are mainly concerned with getting people into their new program who can make the most of what they have to offer, then I can understand. But I still don’t agree.

Isn’t the point of technology and digital education to make learning more available to everyone? A move like this strikes me as a step in the opposite direction, away from inclusion and towards exclusion based on either 1) Wealth to afford the technology, or 2) An upbringing that allowed you access to technology (in other words, middle/upper class). Surely that can’t be an acceptable dividing line?

Beyond all of that though is the question: If your limiting your program only to those who have the ability to make the best use of what you are designing, isn’t that a design flaw to begin with? If you must be sufficiently talented to get anything out of the program, then perhaps the program itself isn’t organized in the most useful, and educational way.

This isn’t a grade-point level, or some requirement that is open to everyone. Anyone can take Math 30, Bio 30, etc. This points to skills that only a select percentage of the population have the opportunity to develop, and even worse, one that is tied to material wealth and access.

To me, that’s the opposite of what the new wave of education is supposed to provide, and at the very core, against the ethos of our educational system.

What do you think? Am I reading to much into all of this? Outside of this caveat, what do you think of the total program? In your mind, what would make it a success, and allow it to spread?

Ryan

Big Brother a good thing?

Hey and thanks for stopping by!

Have you heard of Flash Robs?

A short description would be to start with your average Flash MOB, a social network and text-message organized group, comprised mainly of youths, who ‘spontaneously/on purpose descend on a particular area to do something unexpected. In this example they aren’t kids, but you get the idea.) Now, add in theft, violence, occasional assault, and other crimes. You have a Flash Rob.

And they are starting to sweep the continent.

A short Google search reveals them in Ottawa, Washington, Maryland, etc.

Organized online or via text.

Police are baffled on what to do.

So what does that have to do with us?

It seems the question is: how much monitoring should be allowed of online activity and text messages?

I don’t want this to turn into a knee-jerk reaction of monitor everything, or conversely to simply decree it as invasion of privacy.

Somewhere in the middle there has to be an answer.

Perhaps more poignant to us, what degree of responsibility do we are facilitators, educators, and adults have to ensure that technology in our spheres is not being used for illegal activity? And how can we do that?

At one point I taught in a school that had a program installed on every computer that allowed an administrator to log everything that went on that computer, complete with the ability to pull up a live screen shot of what was on any of the monitors in the school at any moment. That seems extreme, but yet I could understand the motive behind it – to a point. While I think there could be a strong argument that was an invasion of privacy, was it really? If you use public technology, should you be subject to that kind of close monitoring?

What about in schools? We have all seen the signs about not going to inappropriate websites; do we simply add in that anyone caught engaging in criminal/questionable activity will also lose their computer time? That seems weak, and a half measure at best. So what can be done, if anything? It’s hard enough to keep tabs on a single child, let alone a library full of them.

And that doesn’t even touch on Cell Phone usage.

There will be some who rightly say it comes down to parenting, and it does. But at the same time, we want our schools, libraries, and classrooms to be communities, and that means we have to take a certain responsibility for upbringing, instilling morals, and yes, correction and discipline – beyond just passing the actual problem on to others to deal with (parent, principals, police, etc).

I’m really stumped on this one as you may be able to tell. We want to people to engage in technology, in a digital and multimedia universe, and I think that is an admirable goal. But by doing so, we seem to open ourselves up to problem and challenges that we couldn’t imagine. Trying to stay abreast of them can seem daunting, but don’t we owe it to our students, ourselves, and society as a whole to pay more attention and seek answers?

How to do it though becomes a slippery slope. We don’t want the government and institutions in out computers and minds all the time. We want freedom of thought, expression, and speech. Those thing by very definition require a reduction in censorship, spying, and control. But what happens when that freedom turns ugly and illegal? This won’t be intervention against revolution and people rising up against tyranny, but crimes we all agree on that are wrong? (We’ll save the philosophical discussion on perhaps our society is set up wrong and hence forcing people to do these things. Or even darker, that we simply have been brainwashed to think this is how society should operate by an already existing ‘Big Brother’.)

How do we stop what is ‘good’ intervention now from becoming ‘bad’ intervention later?

“The price of freedom is eternal vigilance”, but at the same time “A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both, and deserve neither.”

What do you think? How far should we go into monitoring things? Is it even our job? Or are we simply facilitators?

Ryan

 

Personal Reflection…

As mentioned, today is sadly the end of ETAD802, and I wanted to give some closing thoughts.

These past few weeks have started something of a journey for me on the pathway of educational technology. As I have learnt more, some of the divisions I thought existed between digital and print mediums, between the past and the future, have started to erode away. That tension is there, but it is only one way of seeing the challenges and opportunities that await our attention.

It no longer is a about whether technology CAN save the day, or even if technology SHOULD save the day. It’s not Deus Ex Machina. Rather, it is about which of the seemingly infinite paths in front of us we are going to take.

Cliche I know, but still true.

Sometimes we can all get caught up in the excitement of some many new ways of thinking and sharing information.

That is good.

Other times we can get wrapped up in thinking about ‘the good old days’.

Having a sense of the past is also good.

However, the best path lies somewhere in the middle I think, with an openness to both the lessons of the past, and the opportunities of the future. This path is hard though, as it forces us to decide what we really value, and then confront some ideas that may make us uncomfortable.

Libraries are no exception. Rather, as places that appeal to masses of people from all the various strata of life, those challenges become multiplied. Each person is going to have their own opinion of how things should proceed, and trying to find a path that makes everyone happy would be impossible.

But I think there are several salient aspects of libraries that draw people, and as long as they remain primary, the peripherals can change to keep abreast of things.

The same goes for school libraries, though I feel that in many ways they lag farther behind public libraries. The role of a school library seems to be harder to pin down, yet once they are gone they are always missed. To me, that speaks to them being far more then simply internet connections, or places to study, or a room to go and read a story in.

At the very heart of it a school library is a communal experience; a chance to experience learning outside of the normal desk/whiteboard setting. It allows us to learn and interact in a way that sometimes seems forgotten in our Western model of lessons plans, achievement goals, and testing. The sense of wonder and joy in learning seems closer to the surface somehow when education takes a step back from rigidity, and libraries play a crucial role in that. Regardless of medium or mode, whether in paper serials, e-books, audio cassette, or MP3 – as long as that experience of unshackled freedom is maintained, then school libraries will be worth more then their budgetary sums.

Finding ways to help schools appreciate what that brings to education maybe the bigger challenge then format and technology.

We as educators have more tools, ideas, and opportunities then ever before; and they keep on growing. The question is, can we look beyond personal bias, hype, and stubbornness to collaboratively build the best educational system for, and with, our students?

In the end, that is truly what it’s all about.

Ryan

Easy access…

Well folks, this marks post will mark the end of my ‘official’ course-based blog entries. But rest assured, I hope to continue posting on this blog about education, technology, libraries, etc. As a general rule, I will try to keep my current Tuesday/Friday posting schedule, so if you are so inclined, consider this an invitation to stop by. 🙂

There have been many varied and wide-ranging discussion in the past, but I wanted to give some sense of closure to the E-books in schools conversation.

To begin with, as I was reading through things on the Web I found this study on Investopedia about ‘renting’ e-textbooks, and whether it saves students money. The findings indicate that students potentially could save money by renting their textbooks from sites such as Amazon and Barnes and Noble, though savings depend both on the edition and on the length of renting term needed.

What a cool idea!

Having the ability to pick how long you need the book for, and then get access to it at a discounted rate seems like the perfect marriage between cash strapped students, schools, and boards and distributors who still aim to make money off their products.

Obviously, the benefit for schools and institutions could be limitless, as school that are able to use electronic formats, but perhaps not able to forward the digital licenses to purchase copies of books in their budgets, could ‘rent’ copies of them for a school year; with potential savings.Being able to stay abreast of new editions, and getting their hands on new resources for a fraction of the cost, seems like something that could really take off.

However there are drawbacks as well.

The recurring cost of renting textbooks will definitely outpace the onetime purchase expenditure over the course of 2-3 years. While this may make it more accessible in the here and now, overtime it would be more cost-efficient to simply buy the book.

Additionally, since after the rental period is up you lose your access to the book, having a nicely marked up text that you can continually reference as a teacher would not be possible. Yes there are note taking programs that would help mitigate this problem, but it would require some training time to get all teachers on board. (Beyond trying to get them to accept E-books to begin with)

Finally, while it may be fine for elementary and secondary schools, I worry about this movement for university and graduate students. It is a nice way to save money, and with textbook costs rising beyond recognition, that will help ease the burden of University life. However, once again after the rental, the book is gone.

No personal library of course texts to refer to later – without another rental.

No resale income from old textbooks. (And rental prices aren’t so low that wouldn’t be missed)

While I realize the majority of texts are resold anyways, that is a CHOICE that can be made at the end of the semester. If a book is particularly useful, the student can choose to keep it. If not, they sell it. In this format, they have no choice. And it would be another expenditure to either rent it again, or purchase it.

Overall though, this appears to be the wave of the future. What I wonder, is if schools will find anything enticing them to go this route, or if they will stay with the cycle of upgrading textbooks every number of years?

Any other thoughts on this? Did I miss something?

Ryan

Ethics and the E-book

Welcome back!

I’d like to continue a discussion that we started last time about electronic textbooks, and digital publications in general, for schools. Monday’s post showed how the arrival of E-books is happening, and within 5-10 years will make-up a large chunk of textbooks sales, and provide an interesting option for schools and students to look at. Additionally, it was pointed out the ease of publishing works via digital means vs standard printers, and how that makes it far easier for new works to get on the market (and at lower costs).

But what about the ethics of E-book use?

As it stands right now, there are some bitter debates on copyright laws between publishers and consumers. My purpose is not to rehash the same arguments that go back to the Napster/MP3 battles, but rather to look at what does that mean for schools and libraries?

I think we can all agree that digital formats offer wonderful potentials for education, but what about the cost associated with them? What about availability? Is it right to encourage students to download copies of books, that they would ordinarily have to pay for, from file sharing sites for free?

It seems illogical that a school or teacher could encourage circumvention of copyright laws, even if they are deemed unfair, and still retain any ability to instill respect and obedience for other laws in their students. Let alone the legality of encouraging that, even by turning a blind eye, by anyone employed in Education.

Obviously, the debate about the ethical obligation of teachers and schools to instill values in students is a rather old, and sometimes tired, debate. But yet it still raises up passions in people, especially as the situation always changes nearly as fast as the calendar flips.

There are those who would argue that students, schools, educators, and people in general should have free access to knowledge and literature. Any attempt to restrict, even if it is by fees and costs, should be resisted.

Still others would claim that c capitalist society is based on commerce. However, where the overheads are minimal, so should be the costs associated with access to the material. Since the product can be found for free, it’s perfectly fine to do whatever it takes to get it.

Another group may claim that since it can’t be policed effectively, that means it is beyond the pale. Until such time as the laws can be applied, it’s a free for all.

Then there are those who feel that even though you may get away with it, and that it may be a ‘small’ breach of the law, it’s still wrong.

All of these points have merits, and all of them make a compelling personal case for our conduct.

The question though, is what code do SCHOOLS have an obligation to follow? Is it up to the individual educator and board to decide? Or should there be a larger ethos that informs this choice?

I understand that this conversation can cut close to the bone for many people. But that often makes for a good discussion, or at least a good couple minutes of private pondering.

I’m going to close with my own opinion, just so that I’m not hiding behind the discussion.

I think schools CANNOT, SHOULD NOT, and MUST NOT fall prey to the allure of using, tacitly approving or encouraging, and in anyway being party to circumvention of copyright laws. We may not agree with the laws as they are written; it may be cheaper and easier to ignore them; and in the end it may even help our pedagogy in the here and now, but what message does it send to our students and the community as a whole? We can’t choose to only uphold the rules that don’t inconvenience us, and we can’t get mired in philosophical debates with ourselves on legality WITHIN our classroom practices. Work to change rules. Speak up against them. Encourage students to do the same. But DO NOT encourage them to, do not lead by example in showing them how to, ignore the rules.

Ryan